Unnatural Law

December 29, 2014

Contrary to some reports, this had nothing to do with him turning into a werewolf. Not directly, anyway.

According to NBC News, for example, Yair Tawil is the seventh son of his family, which according to legend means that he is cursed to become a werewolf on every full moon after his 13th birthday unless he is adopted by another family. (Seventh daughters become witches.) Argentine presidents have been "adopting" seventh sons or daughters since 1907, and while the body of NBC's report doesn't actually say this is motivated by the werewolf legend, the headline ("Argentina's President Adopts Boy to End Werewolf Curse") really kind of does. Many other news outlets have offered similar reports.

But according to The Guardian, these are two separate and unrelated traditions.

Quoting an actual Argentine historian, even, The Guardian's report says that there is indeed an old legend in which a seventh son, or even worse, the seventh son of a seventh son, is likely to fall victim to the curse of the lobizón. The lobizón is sort of a werewolf, or a werething, anyway:

In the Argentinian version, the lobizón transforms into a mixture of pig and dog every Tuesday and Friday night—not just once every full moon. Unlike other werewolves of myth, the lobizón transmits its curse not through its bite but by passing between the legs of its unfortunate victims.

This was supposedly adapted by Argentina's gauchos from the older European werewolf legends, because apparently they liked those legends but thought they weren't goofy enough.

But the presidential-adoption tradition dates back only to 1907, and according to the historian, it is "not in any way connected" to the werewolf legend. Rather, it apparently derives from a Russian tradition in which the Tsar became godfather to seventh sons, a custom that Russian immigrants asked Argentina's president to adopt in 1907. A law was later passed (either "Law 20,843" or this presidential decree, or maybe both) providing that under certain circumstances every person "who has been sponsored by the Chief Executive" in this way will receive a gold medal and a scholarship.

The law doesn't seem to mention the werewolf thing, but that would certainly be another potential benefit.

It is not impossible—though presumably the historian looked into this—that the Russian tradition itself arose from a similar legend, which would mean that the Argentine adoption law ultimately is werewolf-based, if remotely. There are plenty of folk traditions around the world involving seventh sons, or seventh sons of seventh sons, although the special powers such people are said to have are not necessarily evil. (I'm going to link to a Wikipedia article for this one, really just because it starts out "This article is about the folklore concept. For the Iron Maiden album, see Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.") But to find out whether the Tsar did adopt seventh sons, let alone did so because they might go werewolf otherwise, is going to take further research. Same for the allegation in some of these reports that the Argentine law was enacted partly to stop an existing practice of abandoning seventh sons because of this superstition.

One way or another, had I known about this one before now, it would be in the book. Someone in Brazil was kind enough to send me a ridiculous law from that country, but maybe my influence hasn't spread any further south yet. (I blame you, Paraguay.)

September 30, 2014

After I reported on the case of Donald Miller, the Ohio man who failed to convince a judge he should not be considered legally dead ("'No, You're Still Deceased,' Judge Tells Dead Man" (Oct. 10, 2013)), several people wrote in to ask what would happen if, for example, Miller was asked to pay taxes or charged with a crime. While the statute in question does say that a legal death is presumed to have occurred "for all purposes under the law of this state," my guess was that the state would not have much trouble ignoring such language in appropriate circumstances.

And the answer is that not only is death no defense, if you kill someone else while dead you can still get the death penalty.

According to several reports (FindLaw, Huffington Post), a Mississippi man who was declared legally dead in 1994 was sentenced to actual death last Friday for a kidnapping and murder he committed in 2010. While he was prosecuted under federal law, as far as I can tell the issue of his state-law legal status never came up. It doesn't look like it would have helped anyway, because the Mississippi statute is more limited than Ohio's, but I seriously doubt any court presented with this argument in this kind of case would get to the point of statutory construction. So, once again, I am shown to be master of the relatively obvious.

As in the Washington case, police in Austin said they had no reason to suspect foul play in this case but would still like to chat with the skull's previous owner (sorry—second owner). I guess if I were that person's lawyer, I would have to advise him or her not to accept this invitation. Don't really see much of an upside, and encounters with law enforcement have been known to go badly for the innocent.

On the other hand, if you unlawfully removed this skull from its first owner, the number to call is 512-974-5210.

I did a little research on the question of what one should do with an unwanted human skull in Texas. Probably the answer is "give it to the coroner," but researching this in Texas was more difficult than it might be elsewhere given the number of spurious Google results involving "longhorn skulls" and "giant human skulls" said to verify parts of the Book of Genesis. (Try it yourself.) Nor could I find a quick answer when searching Texas laws. I did find this: "If a county discovers cash in the possession of a deceased pauper, a county may use the cash to pay the actual costs incurred by the county in disposing of the pauper's body," which is nice. Leftover cash of the pauper goes into a trust fund, which presumably is not sizeable.

It was much easier to answer the question, "So where do I get a human skull [sorry—second human skull] if not at Goodwill?" Well, your best option may be to buy one from Skulls Unlimited:

So, you’re probably thinking, “Why should I buy from Skulls Unlimited?” Sure, you may be able to find natural bone skulls for less elsewhere. But, you know the old saying, “You get what you pay for"....

With our products, you never have to worry about missing or cracked dentition, flaking or poor bone quality, or rank-smelling oils leaching from the bone. This is why quality matters!

Sure, who doesn't get tired of rank-smelling oils leaching from the bone? With Skulls Unlimited, that's a thing of the past. They offer a wide range of real human skulls and other skeleton parts, which they are careful to note "are only obtained from legal and ethical sources." I have no reason to doubt this. If a skull is too pricey (a good specimen goes for close to $2,000), they sell lots of other skeleton-related stuff too. I will say that the skull carrying cases seem like a bargain at just $99.

Turns out Skulls Unlimited will also buy good-quality skulls, so maybe that's the answer here. I doubt you could write off a skull donation to Goodwill anyway, so this might be your best option.

Or to the closely related question of why that person thought Goodwill would be the right place to drop off human remains.

To be fair, Goodwill does not include human remains on the list of things it will and will not accept. It doesn't want animals or hazardous materials, but I wouldn't put a nice clean skull in either of those categories. It will accept "antiques and collectibles," "household items," and "toys," so those categories might have caused some confusion here, depending. But for future reference, Goodwill does not want your used skulls.

For further future reference, the place to take them, if they must be taken somewhere, would be the medical examiner's office. Under Washington law, "every person who knows of the existence and location of skeletal human remains"—which would appear to include you, guy with a human-skull paperweight—must notify the coroner and local law enforcement unless there is "good reason to believe such notice has already been given." This statute is likely meant to apply to skeletons you might come across in the woods, not the ones in your closet, but it seems broad enough to cover those too.

On the other hand, this statute provides that if you've had remains for 90 days or more, and the relatives of "or persons interested in" the deceased have not provided instructions, then the remains "may be disposed of by the person ... having such lawful possession thereof, under and in accordance with rules adopted by the funeral and cemetery board ...." I couldn't find those rules (not that I looked veryhard), but the law also provides that any one performing such a disposition (except for cremated remains) must do so in a cemetery or church.

So that would seem to rule out Goodwill.

While it is a crime to dispose of remains improperly, authorities said they would not prosecute in this case in hopes of encouraging the skull donor to step forward. They do not suspect the donor of separating the skulls from their original owners—the two pictured above appear to have been used for medical/educational purposes, and a third was more than 100 years old. But that third one was said to be the skull of a Native American, which under state law must be returned to the tribe of origin. The promise of immunity is in hopes of getting further information so this could be done.

Again, as of last week the examiner's office said it had not received any information about the Goodwill skulls, but the publicity had prompted three other people to come forward with skeletons they apparently had hanging around. Police said none of those were considered relevant to a criminal case, either, but the report didn't give further details.

The Seattle Times quoted one official as saying that "people find themselves in possession of unwanted, or unknown, human remains more often than most people might think." Tell me about it—that's why I had to quit drinking. (Just kidding! I haven't quit drinking.) Although the Goodwill donation was something new, she said the medical examiner's office "has found remains sold at garage sales, for sale on Craigslist and even at estate sales."

May 29, 2014

According to the Telegraph (thanks, Nathan & Matt), the family of His Holiness Shri Ashutosh Maharaj Ji has asked a court to investigate the guru's alleged death earlier this year, and, if he is in fact dead, to order that his body be released to them for cremation. Others are concerned about control of the significant assets held by the religious order Ashutosh founded. But according to reports, the guru's aides have insisted that Ashutosh is not dead, he has just been holding his breath since January.

Not even kidding, really:

While he is thought to have died from a heart attack, his devotees believe he has simply drifted into a deeper form of the meditation he promotes as a pathway to self-realisation.

A statement on the group's website reads: "His Holiness Shri Ashutosh Maharaj Ji has been in deep meditative state (Samadhi) since 29th January 2014."

According to one of his aides, who asked not to be named, "Maharaj has been in deep meditation. He has spent many years meditating in sub-zero temperatures in the Himalayas, there is nothing unusual in it. He will return to life as soon as he feels [ready] and we will ensure his body is preserved until then," he said.

Oh, the other fact you need to know to explain that last paragraph is that they are currently keeping His Holiness in a freezer.

Oh, nicely done, pop-up ad server. Nicely done.

I admit I don't know a lot about Hinduism, and knew nothing at all (until now) about "samadhi." At times like these, of course, one turns to Wikipedia. It describes samadhi in various ways. For example, samadhi is said to be "a non-dualistic state of consciousness in which ... the experiencing subject becomes one with the experienced object ... a state of complete control over the functions and distractions of consciousness," or, in Western terms, a state of "equilibrium." According to Indian scripture, one who has reached samadhi "transcends the sphere of experiences of smell, taste, touch, speech and consciousness," reaching a "zero state" that is "absolute stillness." Indeed, this last quote goes on to say, one who has reached samadhi "becomes stiff like a log of wood."

Okay, fine, but in this case the guy is also now frozen solid.

NURMAHAL: Ashutosh Maharaj, ... who was declared clinically dead, has completed one month in Himalaya-like conditions, albeit in a freezer.

Times of India (Mar. 2, 2014)

And it does seem like there's a significant difference between achieving such perfect mental equilibrium that one may appear to be dead—a state that yogis can allegedly maintain for quite some time—and actually being dead. That is, if Ashutosh didn't actually die of a heart attack in January as the doctors say, but rather just entered a state of deep meditation, very suddenly, and right after complaining of chest pains, he'd be dead now because they froze him. In fact, the freezing seems like sort of an admission of his deadness.

I reach this conclusion despite a spin effort that you really have to admire: "Yes, His Holiness has been in the deep freezer since January.... Is that a "bad sign"? No, not at all. He has spent many years meditating in sub-zero temperatures in the Himalayas, so there is nothing unusual in it. In fact, His Holiness prefers the cold.... What's that? What brand of freezer? Oh, I see. 'Sub-Zero,' yes, very good. Well, if there are no further questions...."

Also supporting my conclusion is another aide's statement that the freezing was arranged only after "some changes were noted in his skin (as it had turned greenish)." So there is that too.

As noted above, some cynics have suggested that these people are only claiming that Ashutosh is still sort of alive because they are concerned about keeping control of some very significant assets (said to total "1,000 crore," which turns out to be 10 billion rupees, or something like $170 million US). I'm not necessarily saying that. I'm just saying that "he's not dead, he's just resting" is an argument that, historically, has not been all that persuasive.